Greg Duke
The Bartholomew County Council has voted to raise pay for certain county employees starting next month, capping off about a year of discussion, debate and stalemate on the issue while staff continues to leave county government in droves.
The council voted 6-1 Tuesday to amend the county’s salary ordinance and increase salaries for 169 employees to the average or mid-range level of pay of those doing the same jobs in other counties based on a recent salary study and recommendations from department heads, according to figures provided by the Bartholomew County Auditor’s Office.
Council President Greg Duke was the only member to vote against the raises.
The raises, which take effect July 1, will cost the county about $263,954 this year, well below the $1 million the council set aside during last year’s budget process for the purpose of raising salaries, according to figures from the auditor’s office.
Overall, the county employs more than 400 people but lost 35 employees during the first five months of the year, which county officials said was “much higher” than normal.
However, the raises vary in amount, ranging from about $21 to more than $7,500 annually for some full-time employees, though many of the raises were well over $1,000 per year, the auditor’s office reported.
The vote came 13 months after the council voted 4-3 to hire Muncie-based Waggoner, Irwin, Scheele & Associates to do conduct a study to determine which county employees are underpaid compared to their peers in other counties. The county paid the company $14,640 to do the study.
This past spring, the company presented the study’s results to the council during a work session, though some members criticized the results, The Republic previously reported.
At the time, Councilman Matt Miller, who voted against commissioning the study, had an intense verbal confrontation with a company official during the presentation, alleging that the company delivered the study’s results “seven-and-a-half months late.”
In response, Bartholomew County Auditor Pia O’Connor quoted part of the county’s contract with the company that stated the salary and benefit study would be completed by the end of 2021 and presented to the council in early 2022.
In the same work session, Duke said he was upset, calling the outcome “completely unacceptable.”
In April, the council was given a binder with a variety of concerns from department heads. Miller and Duke questioned the authenticity of the study, as well as the company’s ability to fix what they saw as errors.
Later that month, the measure stalled after the council voted 3-3 on the raises, with Miller absent. Since then, Bartholomew County Deputy Auditor Daline Pattingill has met with department heads to discuss their concerns and recommendations for salary raises.
However, the drama over the salary increases continued on Tuesday, with tempers flaring at points during the discussion on the raises, which lasted about an hour.
At one point, a councilman asked, “Can we find common ground?”
“No, not for me because you’re balancing on the back of taxpayers, so you’re not going to get my vote,” Duke said. “The one thing that has not come up (is) taxpayers. The taxpayers are the one that are paying the freight on this whole deal, and we don’t talk about it, so I’m talking about it. We’re starting down a very slippery path.”
“I’m still in favor of raises,” Duke said about 30 minutes before voting against them. “Substantial raises for some people at the low end.”
“You’re saying ‘no’ to it, because that’s exactly what we’re trying to do,” said Councilman Mark Gorbett.
“No, I’m saying ‘no’ to the notion that we deal with this outside of the regular budget process because the regular budget process, in a few months’ time, the totality of this will be laid out in front of us,” Duke said. “We can be very reasonable with our employees.”
Then District 4 councilman Jorge Morales, asked, “So, basically, you don’t want to do anything until (the budget process)?”
“That’s my preference,” Duke replied. “That’s my attitude.”
Gorbett then said, “This is still part of last year’s budget process and haven’t finished. You’re wanting to kick it to another budget process?”
“That’s what’s in the best interest of the taxpayer,” Duke replied. “They have a reasonable expectation on our part to be fully informed before we vote on things and to plan the county’s financial future based on the totality of circumstances. To me, that is best done by having all of the offices and departments putting everything that they want in front of us, having the salary study, trying to reconcile all these things into a coherent budget for 2023.”
At the same time, Miller repeatedly expressed concerns about next year’s budget and pushed his colleagues to agree to cap the county’s budget increase next year at 4%. However, no vote was formally taken on the matter.
Gorbett, addressing Miller, said if county departments request funding for 2023 that the county can’t afford, “our department heads need to realize that we did something for our employees.”
“What are you going to do for taxpayers?” Duke interrupted. “What’s your plan on that?”
Then Duke turned to Morales and asked: “Do you got an answer for that question?”
“I think that the taxpayer has spoken on election day,” Morales answered.
“I think they’ve had a backseat in this discussion,” Duke said.
“I think they spoke loudly in May, Greg, in your election,” Gorbett said.
Duke, who lost to challenger Leah Beyer in the May 3 GOP primary, replied: “I don’t vote on the basis of elections or election results. I vote on the imperative of my and our duty.”
“You asked a question, and I gave you an answer,” Morales said.
